H.R.T.C. Vs. GOPAL KRISHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition, under articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, has been filed by the Himachal Road Transport Corporation and two of its functionaries, for judicial review of order dated 17th September, 2001, passed by H.P. State Administrative Tribunal (now defunct) in O.A. No. 37/1992, filed by respondent Gopal Krishan.

(2.) RELEVANT facts may be summed up thus. Respondent, Gopal Krishan was appointed as conductor in Himachal Road Transport Corporation initially in the year 1976 on daily wage basis. His services were found unsatisfactory and he was, therefore, removed. Somehow or the other, he was reappointed in the year 1984; this time also on daily wage basis. His services were regularized in April, 1985. He committed some acts of dereliction of duty, for which he was charged. Ultimately, he was removed from service. He filed an appeal against the order of his removal from service to the higher departmental authority. Though the said authority upheld his removal, yet taking a lenient view, ordered that he be re -employed on daily wage basis. He was then re -employed sometime in the year 1989 and then his services were regularized. In may, 1990, he was discharged, while on probation. He challenged the order of his discharge by filing OA No. 37/1992 before the State Administrative Tribunal. It was alleged that even though the wording of the order of discharge was innocuous and it indicated that it was an order of discharging simplicitor, in fact the respondent had been punished for the alleged act of his having not issued tickets to certain passengers and, therefore, the Inquiry was required to be conducted before he could be thrown out of service. Respondent alleged that the order was stigmatic and in case record of the petitioners was examined that would substantiate his allegation.

(3.) H .R.T.C. and two of its functionaries have challenged the order of Tribunal. They allege that the order is against the well settled proposition of law that an employee, who is not suitable and fit for service, can be removed during the probation, without assigning any reason or without conducting any inquiry.